| Revision as of 02:24, 6 August 2023 editUntamed1910 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,145 edits Warning: Three-revert rule on Concerns_and_controversies_at_the_2012_Summer_Olympics.Tag: Twinkle← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:33, 6 August 2023 edit undo67.149.160.101 (talk) →August 2023: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit → | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
| '''Being involved in an edit war can result in you being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you do not violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] (]) 02:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC) | '''Being involved in an edit war can result in you being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you do not violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] (]) 02:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC) | ||
| :The rich irony of the warning you have placed here you fell right in to the bear trap to show you are also an edit warrior. ] (]) 03:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
| {{Block indent|''If this is a ], and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider ] for yourself or ] so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.''}}<!-- Template:Shared IP advice --> | {{Block indent|''If this is a ], and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider ] for yourself or ] so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.''}}<!-- Template:Shared IP advice --> | ||
Revision as of 03:33, 6 August 2023
Good evening and salutations fellow editor. I reverted your deletion of long-sourced material in an article regarding gender reveal parties.
you seem passionate about this topic, it could use more properly sourced unbiased material. so, great.
please discuss on the talk page removals of previous cited content.
thanks and happy editing, Saintstephen000 (talk)
recent edits on gender reveal parties
Good evening and salutations fellow editor. I reverted your deletion of long-sourced material in an article regarding gender reveal parties.
you seem passionate about this topic, it could use more properly sourced unbiased material. so, great.
please discuss on the talk page removals of previous cited content.
thanks and happy editing, Saintstephen000 (talk) Saintstephen000 (talk) 23:11, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
September 2022
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Funcrunch (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
August 2023
Hello, I'm FenrisAureus. I noticed that you recently removed content from Concerns and controversies at the 2012 Summer Olympics without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Misplaced Pages with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 01:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did at Concerns and controversies at the 2012 Summer Olympics, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. If you have an issue with the inclusion of content you should bring it to the talk page of the article in question — FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 01:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- It is clear you are not reading the edit summaries I am leaving please do so or stop.
- The article even asks to prune out what is and is not a topic of controversy at the top of the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.160.101 (talk)
- I did in fact read your edit summaries. Please do not delete entire sections of well sourced content without consensus on the talk page of the article in question. If you continue to do so you risk being blocked from editing.— FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 01:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I suggest reading the content and following the dead links. The section is nonsense. Tt is like complaining about some countries having better clothes or food. It is no different to counties in rowing complaining of lighter blades or better rowing seats. Absolute and utter whole cloth absurd and a million miles away from a controversy. It is how sport works, it's called sports technology, without people would be running round barefoot chasing lumps of leather on football grass and bikes would weigh tonnes and have one brake. It's the modern world and the section reads of howling at the moon that some people have and some people have not. Gimme a break sport is never fair, what next we have a section on genetic advantages of fast runners?
- Also threats are not welcome. You keep on adding back in stuff which does not belong that the article specifically asks to remove. I will remove it again unless you give me a reason why this should be included, simply 'well sourced content without consensus' is not a good enough reason. No consensus will exist ever again on that long dead talk page and the sources do not automatically make this a controversy.
- Over to you on why this stuff should remain. 67.149.160.101 (talk) 02:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Misplaced Pages without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Concerns and controversies at the 2012 Summer Olympics. — FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 02:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
You are the one not leaving reasons, and just putting back in the stuff. You are doing what you are claiming I am doing when I am not doing what you are claiming. See above for the detailed reasons. I also cannot see any reasons from you. If you are trying to scare me with being blocked you should be equally scared as you are just putting back in and not giving any reasons. It feels very difficult it seems to get you to actually read all of the section and the things I am writing. It seems you just want to scold and revert. Please read the section and tell me if you honestly and genuinely believe it meets the template at the top of the page and if it should stay or go. Sod the sources they are mostly dead and are about nothingness.
Your recent editing history at Concerns_and_controversies_at_the_2012_Summer_Olympics shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Untamed1910 (talk) 02:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- The rich irony of the warning you have placed here you fell right in to the bear trap to show you are also an edit warrior. 67.149.160.101 (talk) 03:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)